I don’t understand why cessationOfOperation (5)
would not be applicable for TLS certificates.  If the service with the 
certificate is taken down prior to the expiration of the certificate and the 
operator of that service is responsible and notifies the CA, requesting 
revocation of the certificate, this seems like the most applicable reason code 
to use.

For TLS certificates, I would think this should be more common than 
affiliationChanged (3) which seems to me to be more likely a reason code used 
with certificates associated with people.

Thanks,

Wendy

Wendy Brown
Protiviti Government Services
703-965-2990 (cell)

[email protected]




From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On 
Behalf Of Kathleen Wilson
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2021 4:44 PM
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Revocation Reason Codes for TLS End-Entity Certificates



All,

Building on a previous discussion here in MDSP, Addressing Current Limitations 
of CRL Revocation Reason Codes 
<https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/g/dev-security-policy/c/SIqvgTmKnno/m/UPsTMDGAAwAJ<https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fa%2Fmozilla.org%2Fg%2Fdev-security-policy%2Fc%2FSIqvgTmKnno%2Fm%2FUPsTMDGAAwAJ&data=04%7C01%7Cwendy.brown%40protiviti.com%7C9580c962524c4d67501808d9b513e615%7C16532572d5674d678727f12f7bb6aed3%7C0%7C0%7C637739920550786538%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=0qRM9V1SxNeEiwDmfJ%2BB9Cy9lMK3OxM3ZGPghQ2joa0%3D&reserved=0>>
 , I would like to have a discussion about which CRL revocation reason codes 
are applicable to TLS. My goals for this discussion are:

* Specify when certain revocation codes should or should not be used.
* Determine when CAs should be required to put revocation codes into CRLs.
* Begin drafting policy language about CRL revocation reason codes.


For reference, please see the “Revocation Reasons” section of the 2009 paper, 
“Troubleshooting Certificate Status and Revocation 
<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions/tn-archive/cc700843(v=technet.10)?redirectedfrom=MSDN<https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.microsoft.com%2Fen-us%2Fprevious-versions%2Ftn-archive%2Fcc700843(v%3Dtechnet.10)%3Fredirectedfrom%3DMSDN&data=04%7C01%7Cwendy.brown%40protiviti.com%7C9580c962524c4d67501808d9b513e615%7C16532572d5674d678727f12f7bb6aed3%7C0%7C0%7C637739920550786538%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=8%2FWlHxKE76b3RuFkNInjWbGdhk2mdr2uevaCFllqn9k%3D&reserved=0>>
 ”, by Brian Komar and David B. Cross, Microsoft Corporation. For this 
discussion, I do not want to debate these meanings, but rather I would like to 
use those meanings as reference to help us determine which revocation reason 
codes should and should-not be used for TLS end-entity certificates.

I propose that the following revocation reason codes are NOT applicable to TLS 
server (end-entity) certificates, meaning that they MUST NOT be used in CRLs 
for TLS server certificates.

* Unspecified (0)
* cACompromise (2)
* cessationOfOperation (5)
* certificateHold (6)
* value 7 is not used
* removeFromCRL (8)
* aACompromise (10)


I propose that only the following existing revocation reason codes ARE 
applicable to TLS server (end-entity) certificates, meaning that CRL entries 
for TLS server certificates must either have one of these reason codes or NO 
reason code.

* keyCompromise (1)
* affiliationChanged (3)
* superseded (4)
* privilegeWithdrawn (9)

==
Below is the beginning of potential policy text relating to these reason codes, 
and is only intended for TLS server (end-entity) certificate revocations.
Note that much of this text is copied from section 4.9.1.1 of the BRs.

keyCompromise (1)
The CRLReason keyCompromise (1) MUST be used when the CA obtains evidence that 
the Subscriber’s Private Key corresponding to the Public Key in the Certificate 
suffered a Key Compromise, or the CA is made aware of a demonstrated or proven 
method that can easily compute the Subscriber’s Private Key based on the Public 
Key in the Certificate (such as a Debian weak key, see 
https://wiki.debian.org/SSLkeys<https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.debian.org%2FSSLkeys&data=04%7C01%7Cwendy.brown%40protiviti.com%7C9580c962524c4d67501808d9b513e615%7C16532572d5674d678727f12f7bb6aed3%7C0%7C0%7C637739920550796520%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=TVPYDnlm7ebhY9qCl88qNYJVBoq%2BYGQbMifPuURYx4A%3D&reserved=0>)

If someone other than the Subscriber requests revocation by providing 
verifiable evidence that the Subscriber's Private Key corresponding to the 
Public Key in the Certificate suffered a Key Compromise, then the CA MUST make 
the information regarding its intent to revoke available to the Subscriber 
before revoking the certificate, and the CA MUST use the keyCompromise (1) 
CRLReason.

The CRLReason keyCompromise (1) MAY be used when one or more of the following 
occurs:

* The Subscriber requests that the CA revoke the Certificate for this reason 
code;
* The Subscriber notifies the CA that the original certificate request was not 
authorized and does not retroactively grant authorization;
* The CA obtains evidence that the validation of domain authorization or 
control for any Fully‐Qualified Domain Name or IP address in the Certificate 
should not be relied upon.

affiliationChanged (3)
The CRLReason affiliationChanged (3) MUST be used when the certificate 
subscriber has requested that their certificate be revoked for this reason, 
otherwise this CRLReason MUST NOT be used.

superseded (4)
The CRLReason superseded (4) MUST be used when the certificate subscriber has 
requested that their certificate be revoked for this reason, otherwise this 
CRLReason MUST NOT be used.

privilegeWithdrawn (9)
The CRLReason privilegeWithdrawn (9) SHOULD be used if one or more of the 
following occurs, and the CA MUST make the information regarding its intent to 
revoke available to the Subscriber before revoking the certificate. Otherwise 
this CRLReason MUST NOT be used.

* The CA obtains evidence that the Certificate was misused;
* The CA is made aware that a Subscriber has violated one or more of its 
material obligations under the Subscriber Agreement or Terms of Use;
* The CA is made aware of any circumstance indicating that use of a 
Fully‐Qualified Domain Name or IP address in the Certificate is no longer 
legally permitted (e.g. a court or arbitrator has revoked a Domain Name 
Registrant’s right to use the Domain Name, a relevant licensing or services 
agreement between the Domain Name Registrant and the Applicant has terminated, 
or the Domain Name Registrant has failed to renew the Domain Name);
* The CA is made aware that a Wildcard Certificate has been used to 
authenticate a fraudulently misleading subordinate Fully‐Qualified Domain Name;
* The CA is made aware of a material change in the information contained in the 
Certificate;
* The CA determines or is made aware that any of the information appearing in 
the Certificate is inaccurate; or
* The CA is made aware of a demonstrated or proven method that exposes the 
Subscriber’s Private Key to compromise or if there is clear evidence that the 
specific method used to generate the Private Key was flawed.


==

I will greatly appreciate your thoughtful and constructive feedback on these 
proposals.

Thanks,
Kathleen

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 
<mailto:[email protected]%20%3cmailto:[email protected]%3e%20>
 " group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
 <mailto:[email protected]> .
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/dev-security-policy/9085ddee-5bea-4dec-9c08-08d70e3cfae9n%40mozilla.org<https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fa%2Fmozilla.org%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Fdev-security-policy%2F9085ddee-5bea-4dec-9c08-08d70e3cfae9n%2540mozilla.org&data=04%7C01%7Cwendy.brown%40protiviti.com%7C9580c962524c4d67501808d9b513e615%7C16532572d5674d678727f12f7bb6aed3%7C0%7C0%7C637739920550796520%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=t9OWvsozsRhMG3gT9owRAqXFXIgTOlIY56BTc1iKtUk%3D&reserved=0>
 
<https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/dev-security-policy/9085ddee-5bea-4dec-9c08-08d70e3cfae9n%40mozilla.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer<https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fa%2Fmozilla.org%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Fdev-security-policy%2F9085ddee-5bea-4dec-9c08-08d70e3cfae9n%2540mozilla.org%3Futm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dfooter&data=04%7C01%7Cwendy.brown%40protiviti.com%7C9580c962524c4d67501808d9b513e615%7C16532572d5674d678727f12f7bb6aed3%7C0%7C0%7C637739920550806444%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=lsZNwcAi0oechSfLFcZFva1SDXjJG1RBH4jO9yfncs8%3D&reserved=0>>
 .

NOTICE: Protiviti is a global consulting and internal audit firm composed of 
experts specializing in risk and advisory services. Protiviti is not licensed 
or registered as a public accounting firm and does not issue opinions on 
financial statements or offer attestation services. This electronic mail 
message is intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is 
addressed. This message, together with any attachment, may contain confidential 
and privileged information. Any views, opinions or conclusions expressed in 
this message are those of the individual sender and do not necessarily reflect 
the views of Protiviti Inc. or its affiliates. Any unauthorized review, use, 
printing, copying, retention, disclosure or distribution is strictly 
prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately 
advise the sender by reply email message to the sender and delete all copies of 
this message. Thank you.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"[email protected]" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/dev-security-policy/SA1PR03MB6626CAF6D5FA70D89E69546BEE6D9%40SA1PR03MB6626.namprd03.prod.outlook.com.

Reply via email to